80Tiger

Verified Member
  • Content count

    2,938
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

136 Sterling

About 80Tiger

  • Rank
    Dept Head
  • Birthday
  1. The point is, if you are going to throw out a statistical outlier due to bad game planning, then should you not throw out the best performance as a statistical outlier due to good game planning? I am not calling anyone out, but there seems to be a habit of not wanting to count a certain type performance if it does not fit a narrative. I am not saying Stat did that by any means, but if you are going to have all these objective numerical performance but discount bad performance due to a subjective reasoning (bad game planning) then sometimes the numbers will lose some meaning (IMO). Its like dropped passes. A lot of moaning an groaning about dropped passes and how it made QB (choose your name) look bad and affected his numbers, but at the same time receivers will make ridiculous catches that will make the QB numbers look good but we give credit to the QB for a completion (which we should). My point is, to me you have to count bad with good no matter what. The numbers are what they are. Otherwise you tend to fool yourselves.
  2. E, I see so much posting about how this guy recruits or that guy recruits. Historically coaches were responsible and recruited "geographic" locations and not by the position they coached. This allowed the coach to build relationships with high school coaches and with the underclassmen high school guys that they get to know. I know position coaches are brought in eventually because a recruit wants to know who would be playing for. So with all that said, who is responsible for "closing" the deal with a recruit? The "geographic area" guy or the position coach?
  3. Some good info but do not agree with discounting the Clemson game. If you are going to discount the "bad game plan" then you have to throw out the "good game plan" performance. Maybe the first half of the MSU game. I have seen many post on here that our staff is not good at evaluating talent. I actually think our staff evaluated our QB talent correctly last year. No matter who was in playing, we did not throw long because we couldn't so we didn't try much. We need an upgrade in talent at the position. I hope JS, WB and Gatewood are it. I hope CCL brings the balance needed between run and pass no matter the down. I believe tha talent at AU is superior to ASU and the improvement will be seen.
  4. The way we as fans are, after the GSU games, we will have segment putting us the playoffs for next year, and the other segment wanting to fire Gus on the spot.
  5. This. We wanted DW very badly. You can see why.
  6. This. Their offense looks pretty pedestrian. Also pretty sure he was around a .500 coach until this year. I don't see the reason his name keeps getting tossed around here. I see Minnesota is interested in him and that is probably about the right type job.
  7. I have not looked up any reg concerning analyst and coaches and who can be involved during the game. Any prohibition would have been NCAA rules or regs. I was assuming that an analyst did off field review and planning but that was just my assumption and nothing concrete. If an analyst could participate during a game I would have dozens. I didnotice that Sark had a headset on but it did not look like it had the mic portion.
  8. He was not an on the field coach. He was an analyst. Not for sure by any means, but I would think his involvement during the game would be limited if not prohibited.
  9. While Saban maybe was not happy about the O performance, this is as bad as timing as you can get to make this type change. While Sark probably has been involved with the game planning he does not have the game experience for this team and the ebb and flow of how the game is going. So while he has been in the press box with headset on, he should not have had any type communication with Kiffens or Saban during the game. May not change the ultimate outcome of the game, but I do not think this makes their O better. Could make them worse. You do not make this change unless you absolutely have to.
  10. More like Cutty Sark in the water.
  11. RG did not leave on is own. Terry Bowden wanted him out.
  12. Nice thought out and detailed response. You really did your homework on this one. Almost makes me change my position.
  13. You just can't make up hypotheticals and say we score one more and they score one less. There is no guarantee on that. It could have been the exact same result also. Want to talk about "identities"? What about LSU's later in the year? Do we beat them in a later game in the year? I don't know but we did beat them when we played? The only game that injuries probably would have changed the outcome was GA.
  14. That with the fact that the SEC schools have not done very well at all so far. Mentioned many times this year that SEC is a down league and it seems to be proved by the bowl games.
  15. You kinda justified what I was saying. The bottom tier of the SEC west is where we ran up big yardage; Miss Stat, Ole Miss and Arky. The top tier of the west we don't crack the 400 mark. I didn't watch OU enough to know how to compare them to SEC teams, but I would think that they have more talent on both sides of the ball than MSU , Arky, and Ole Miss. And cannot agree at all that injuries cost us the Alabama game. it just wasn't that close. They gained 500 yds and 30 pts. Even when healthy we would not have scored 30 on them.